Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 691

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015

Open access
Katz, Lawrence, Krueger, Alan·2016·National Bureau of Economic Research
DOI 10.3386/w22667
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

To monitor trends in alternative work arrangements, we conducted a version of the Contingent Worker Survey as part of the RAND American Life Panel in late 2015.The findings point to a significant rise in the incidence of alternative work arrangements in the U.S. economy from 2005 to 2015.The percentage of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements -defined as temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers -rose from 10.7 percent in February 2005 to 15.8 percent in late 2015.The percentage of workers hired out through contract companies showed the largest rise, increasing from 1.4 percent in 2005 to 3.1 percent in 2015.Workers who provide services through online intermediaries, such as Uber or Task Rabbit, accounted for 0.5 percent of all workers in 2015.About twice as many workers selling goods or services directly to customers reported finding customers through offline intermediaries than through online intermediaries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w22667

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Katz, L., & Krueger, A.
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Publisher
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2016-09
DOI
10.3386/w22667
OpenAlex
W2527212098
Cited by
691
References
2
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.